Metacrock is still apologizing...

[Diogenes the Cynic]

The Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts, but just for the record, historians reject eyewitness accounts all the time. So do you, for that matter. Do you believe all the witnesses who say they saw Appolonius of Tyana or Sabbatai Zevi do miracles? Do you believe the eyewitnesses who swore they saw Joseph's Smith's golden plates? Do you believe the witnesses who saw Charles Manson make a truck fly? Do you believe the eyewitnesses who have been abducted by aliens? Herodotus said that he saw a gold mine that was mined by giant ants. Do you believe him? I have X-ray vision. Do you believe me?

[Tonto Goldstein]

”This is where I stopped reading.”

And this is why you are exceedingly ignorant.

”The only reason to reject original historical documents is to create your own fictitious history. ”

Yet you reject other historical documents. Thank you for admitting the “history” you ascribe to is fictitious.

”No historian rejects eye-witness accounts, and there's no reason to treat the Bible differently (beyond prejudice, that is).”

So you’re saying you’re not a historian…got it. Yes I concur; you do seem to be quite prejudiced. It’s healthy for you to get this off your chest you know. I think you’re making progress in your path to enlightenment.

[theterminator]

Everything he taught and did was in the open in front of witnesses.

when almighty god impregnated his mother he did not impregnate her in the open. if you were living in palestine at the time jospeph took mary to his house would you assume few months later that mary's pregnancy was due to a miracle?

[beowulf]

Everything he taught and did was in the open in front of witnesses.

when almighty god impregnated his mother he did not impregnate her in the open. if you were living in palestine at the time jospeph took mary to his house would you assume few months later that mary's pregnancy was due to a miracle?

It was a private matter , but it was later well publicized; you are gossiping about it 2000 years later

[andrewcriddle]

Do you believe the eyewitnesses who swore they saw Joseph's Smith's golden plates?

FWIW I tend to believe that the golden plates existed. (But not that the Book of Mormon is a genuine translation of the plates.)

Herodotus said that he saw a gold mine that was mined by giant ants. Do you believe him?

Herodotus does not claim to be an eye-witness here.

Andrew Criddle

[theterminator]

It was a private matter , but it was later well publicized; you are gossiping about it 2000 years later

so until the private matter was revealed, people thought for many years that joseph was the daddy of god almighty?
this would be a natural assumption. who knew she was pregnant before joseph married her? apart from joseph ,who had dreams that god was born of a virgin? 2 gospel writers versus hundreds of eyewitnesses who thought that mary got married and begot a son? the gospel writers want to prove the special nature of the child and the solution they had was to get mary married? how to prove the virgin birth according to luke and matthew? get mary married.

[beowulf]

It was a private matter , but it was later well publicized; you are gossiping about it 2000 years later

so until the private matter was revealed, people thought for many years that joseph was the daddy of god almighty?
this would be a natural assumption. who knew she was pregnant before joseph married her? apart from joseph ,who had dreams that god was born of a virgin? 2 gospel writers versus hundreds of eyewitnesses who thought that mary got married and begot a son? the gospel writers want to prove the special nature of the child and the solution they had was to get mary married? how to prove the virgin birth according to luke and matthew? get mary married.

Only the thinking people who knew the family 'thought ' that Joseph , the husband of Mary, was the 'daddy' of the boy. There is nothing wrong with that.

The unthinking people who knew the family never doubted that the husband was the father of the little boy. That's how good people function in society.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Joe Hoffman has a theory that the virgin birth was invented as an apologetic to cover up for some kind of questionable paternity. I think that actually makes some sense since there really was no expectation at all that the Messiah would be born of a virgin.

[Bernard Muller]

Joe Hoffman has a theory that the virgin birth was invented as an apologetic to cover up for some kind of questionable paternity. I think that actually makes some sense since there really was no expectation at all that the Messiah would be born of a virgin.

I think the virginity of Mary was invented in order to prevent the possibility she was not impregnated by the Holy Spirit or the power of God.
Cordially, Bernard

[maryhelena]

Joe Hoffman has a theory that the virgin birth was invented as an apologetic to cover up for some kind of questionable paternity. I think that actually makes some sense since there really was no expectation at all that the Messiah would be born of a virgin.

Slavonic Josephus has some interesting wording:

“A star shall shine forth from Jacob
and a man shall arise from Judah’.
And Daniel writes that a priest is to come,
but we do not know who this is. We reckon
that he will be born without a father.”

Josephus' Jewish War and Its Slavonic Version: A Synoptic Comparison
H. Leeming (Editor), K. Leeming (Editor)

[my bolding]

"born without a father" that could be read that the father of the child died prior to the birth of the child. i.e. the child has no living father. Enough prospects in that scenario for storytellers to spin their pseudo-historical virgin birth narrative - the dead father has disappeared from view. All that is left is a 'virgin', a young woman, with a child. A situation faced by many women in times of war - or peace.